AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2430 posts, RR: 10 Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 7816 times:
The wings were always the best feature, as far as I was concerned. I don't consider the stout fuselage 'ugly' but it's not exactly a beauty queen, like the A332 and A345, either. What really looks good is the business case based, in particular, on projected Asian air travel growth. The only caveat may be how much might Airbus have to raise prices on this or other lines to cover the recently divulged large program cost growth figures owing to the airframe weight reduction efforts.
Zippyjet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 4724 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 7798 times:
I never noticed the curvature of the wings; cool! I wonder if you will see an A380 Flying Hospital. I realize the flying hospital planes are non profit and usually have to rely on sloppy seconds. (just kidding!) An L1011 is too graceful to be considered sloppy seconds! A gesture of goodwill would be Airbus donating a brand new A 380 to be converted into a flying hospital. Though not as practical because of size, Boeing should extend the same generosity with its shark tailed 787.
AAFLT1871 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2333 posts, RR: 16 Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 7795 times:
Is it just me, I just cannot judge the true size of this beast until I see it with my own eyes or parked next to another wide body for comparison. I saw on here awhile back someone had posted a link showing an animated sketch of a 380 sitting over what was decided on here by many what looked like a 747-200, but it was listed as being a 747-400 series on the link. I know the A380 is bigger, but not as much as the sketch showed. I can see Branson now whoring for his photo op's of a 747-400 and A380 sitting side by side once Virgin takes deliveries of the 380. Maybe giving the nicknames of Big Brother to the A380 and Little Sis to the 747. : )
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 7788 times:
I think it will look fine painted, and in the air.
Until then, I'm siding with this side of the pond on its relative attractiveness.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7748 times:
Quick OT question, but is this the first A380 that will fly? I thought the first was going to be used for static and ground testing only, and I assumed this bird would be the one rolled out in January. Is this the second A380 built in the picture?
I never noticed the curvature of the wings; cool! I wonder if you will see an A380 Flying Hospital. I realize the flying hospital planes are non profit and usually have to rely on sloppy seconds.
Medical flights typically use business jets these days as they fit into more airports and have higher cruise speeds than most ex-commercial airliners.
FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4009 posts, RR: 6 Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7688 times:
In all honesty, it looks better from the back than the front!
It's the nose that does it for me, I can't stand the sight of it...but that's just me.
AAFLT1871 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2333 posts, RR: 16 Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 7652 times:
So you think it looks better from the backside, so your an assman
Had to post that, they just showed the Seinfeld episode where Kramer was "The Assman"
SK A340 From Sweden, joined Mar 2000, 845 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7194 times:
I like it, though I think it would look greater with at longer fuselage. But then it wouldn't fit in to the "famous box" that allows it to operate at existing airports and terminals.
A388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9079 posts, RR: 13 Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6912 times:
I agree that I also don't have a idea of the size of the A380. It looks like a short aircraft but that's probably because of the doubledeck fuselage. The wings, like other have said before, are enormous and comparitively much bigger than the aircraft. That will also have to do with the size of the aircraft. The wings need to give this bird a lot of lift, maybe that explains the wingsize as well.
I'm still trying to figure out whether I should go to TLS at the roll-out ceremony in January or wait for the first flight in March. If it rains a lot (or heavy rain) on the roll-out day, the aircraft will probably not be rolled-out of the factory for long or will it? How long do you think the A380 will be out in the open on the roll-out ceremony? On its first flight, well, that's logical, it must go out to take off whether it's a rainy day or not
Will the A380 be at next year's Paris Air Show in Le Bourget? I can imagine it won't be there because of the certification process. It will have to do a lot of proving tests especially in the first few months (or first year). Airbus may not be to afford the A380 just sitting there at the show when it can make more hours flying for the certification. But then again, it will be a very good marketing move to display the A380 at this major air show and knowing Airbus, they always like to show off their aircraft. The A380 will certainly not be an exception for them.
Glideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1542 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 6725 times:
Nope. Still the ugliest aircraft ever designed. Can't wait for the performance profiles to come in.
"All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved"
Nighthawk From UK - Scotland, joined Sep 2001, 4991 posts, RR: 38 Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 6720 times:
DfwRevolution:
Medical flights typically use business jets these days as they fit into more airports and have higher cruise speeds than most ex-commercial airliners.
What you are referring to is patient transport, ie taking them to the nearest hospital. I think what the Zippyjet was referring to are the flying hospitals that visit africa to treat the Ill. rather than ferry them to the nearest hospital (which in parts of africa there are none) operations and surgery are performed ON the aircraft, parked up at the airport.
I know there is a DC-10 converted to a flying eye surgery (thepic is here on airliners.net somewhere) and im sure ive heard of other flying hospitals.
Newark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 33 Reply 18, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3527 times:
It's the nose that does it for me, I can't stand the sight of it...but that's just me
I agree, the airplane is not as ugly as some people say, but the nose just doesn't look right. If they had put the cockpit on the second level instead of the first, like the 747, I think it would have looked a lot nicer. The cockpit on the bottom just makes it look more bloated.
Bloated or not, I still can't wait to see it all painted and ready to fly.
Trevd From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 327 posts, RR: 3 Reply 19, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2727 times:
Hey, c'mon. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Just look at all the web-sites dedicated to fat chicks. Not likely that Big Bertha is going to look that much better painted. An ugly fat chick in a new dress is still an ugly fat chick!!
Hirnie From Germany, joined May 2004, 581 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2619 times:
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
Agreed.
"Just look at all the web-sites dedicated to fat chicks. Not likely that Big Bertha is going to look that much better painted. An ugly fat chick in a new dress is still an ugly fat chick"
Agreed, but what are you talking about, a 737-100 perhaps?
OK, do`n`t kill me on that, just a little ironic...
The more the A380 gets completed the more it looks good. It`s not a real beauty like the A332, but it doesn`t look that ugly some people state it would be. Saying this I have to quote Trevd again: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
Trevd From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 327 posts, RR: 3 Reply 21, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2516 times:
Hirnie - can't disagree about the 737-100, but I'll think you'll agree that airplane grew into a real beauty with the 737-300/-400 and ultimately today's, 737NG (particularly with winglets) that's probably one of the most gorgeous and graceful aircraft in the air.
But then short-coupled aircraft like the 737-100 and A380 never look good. And the old saying is often true..."If it looks good, it will fly good". Unfortunately for the A380, the opposite applies as well, if it looks bad, it will fly bad.
Hirnie From Germany, joined May 2004, 581 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2394 times:
Trevd - I agree that the 737-300 is a beauty and the 800(winglets or not) even more. But on some models the longer versions don`t have the right proportions to look really good.
As you and me both stated it lies in the eye of the beholder. For me the A332 is more beautiful than the A333 or a B772 for me looks better than a B773. OK ,a B742 looks of course better than a 747SP, but generally in the end a long wing span for me looks good, for other people not.
For sure the A380 will not be the beauty of the skies, but nor is the B744. Both look, good but there are more beautiful planes in the air...
AAFLT1871 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2333 posts, RR: 16 Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1860 times:
"It`s not a real beauty like the A332"
I'm sorry, but the true beauty of the skies will always be the 757.
AAplatnumflier From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1851 times:
Personally I dont like the A380 as I think it is one big ugly beast. I too have to agree that "the 757 will always be the true beuaty of the skies."
25 Byrdluvs747: For sure the A380 will not be the beauty of the skies, but nor is the B744. Don't try to lump the 747 with the ugly A380. The 747 was always beautifu
26 TACAA320: Damn. Still f*ugly. Lets wait three months and will see...
27 Iowaman: For me the A332 is more beautiful than the A333 or a B772 for me looks better than a B773 I think the A330 in NW colors makes NW look bad, the A330 is
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1000 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Mar 2000, 845 posts, 
From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9079 posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Sep 2001, 4991 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1588 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2004, 581 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
